I'm in favor of the change. We can change the git branch names pretty easily, and am willing to do the legwork on that part. I've already checked with INFRA to determine the extent of the consequences, and it looks like it should be minimal, with the right coordination. However, I have been waiting to bring it up on list until the larger ASF and GitHub open source communities have converged on a preferred alternative name. The ones I've seen suggested most are "main/primary/default". I like "main" and "default", but would prefer to stick with whatever convention seems to have the most momentum globally, so we're staying with the mainstream. "main" seems to be gaining the most traction, but I would give it another week or two before we know for sure.
For the accumulo server, this is going to be a little rough. Most internal names and references can be changed relatively easily without disruption. The main breakages would be Thrift API, ZooKeeper storage locations, Monitor XML/JSON, KeywordExecutable/scripts, and property names, with property names being the most user-facing (unless we have a public API with references to the "master", which I don't think we do). Many of these changes can be done independently and incrementally, and we can try to hold off on breaking changes until 3.0, but it will take work to retain compatibility before then. I like the idea to do ranked choice voting to select a name for the server. Let's do that in a new thread, so we can just focus on name selection there. As for actually making changes... Mike Wall asked if we should start a vote. IMO, there's nothing to vote on other than names. Everything else is volunteer-contributed changes... which we can treat like any other pull request. If we need to coordinate, then we can discuss on list, as usual. Voting is for resolving competing opinions, and for releasing. The general idea seems pretty unanimous from those weighing in so far... it's just a matter of doing the work, so other than the names, I don't see anything left to vote on. Christopher On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:07 PM Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Accumulo folks! I would like to start a discussion about renaming the > Accumulo master. Previous discussions were held a few years ago [1]. Some > things have changed since we started that discussion, in the world and in > our project governance, so I think it is worth revisiting this topic. > > If people agree that a rename would be worthwhile, we can start identifying > the many changes that would need to be made (probably a GitHub issue would > be a good place for that). This will be a big change and I am happy to help > work on it. If anyone else is interested in helping out too, I think we > should be able to break the work down into several discrete tasks. > > I believe the best replacement names we came up with on the original ticket > were Coordinator and Conductor. I also wanted to suggest another > possibility that I don't think we considered: Admin / AdminServer. Admin is > generic, but at least it's short. Feel free to share your thoughts and > other ideas, if you have them. > > Billie > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2844
